Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Does everyone 'photoshop' their photos?
Page <<first <prev 4 of 10 next> last>>
May 14, 2019 08:43:58   #
sodapop Loc: Bel Air, MD
 
I saw a beautiful scene. I took a photo of it. The SOOC photo did not show a beautiful scene. I "Photoshopped" it. Then I had the beautiful scene I originally saw.

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:01:07   #
mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey
 
sodapop wrote:
I saw a beautiful scene. I took a photo of it. The SOOC photo did not show a beautiful scene. I "Photoshopped" it. Then I had the beautiful scene I originally saw.



Reply
May 14, 2019 09:04:48   #
SteveR Loc: Michigan
 
unduki wrote:
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how I learn and I don't know the answer. I learned to use 35 mm cameras and the developing smelly MESS in Jr. High. Fast-forward to now, when I do not miss film at all... and I'm using a pretty nice DSLR. I'm older and it seems very foreign to me. Just using the camera has been challenging (very enjoyable though.) I'm currently learning about the settings - one of my projects is the Aurora Borealis.

So, my question is the topic title. Does everyone change things after they've shot? Do folks alter light and color in their Aurora Borealis photos?

Personally, I want my photos to look like what I see with my eyes. Maybe I'm being too myopic. I'm hoping I'll have opportunity sometime this week but I'll post a photo when I get one.
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how... (show quote)


Remember those numbers on your film photos after you got them processed? Somebody enhanced your SOOC photo for the best results....without you really knowing. Probably mainly for exposure and brightness. So all those great photos you got back from the drugstore....we part the result of Ed. You don't have to use Photoshop to save a lot of lost photos. Cropping, brightening, and just adding a little color can make a world of difference. Both Windows 10 and Apple operating systems provide just enough to make a whole lot of difference....actually, no difference than slaving over a negative like Ansel Adams.

Reply
 
 
May 14, 2019 09:05:07   #
gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast
 
Keep in mind that there are settings in your camera that can change to final photo. A JPEG can be made to come out in a range from Neutral to Vivid according to your preferences with many other tweaks available to those who don’t want to do much editing on the computer. If you decide to shoot in RAW, then most of these tweaks don’t apply AND you absolutely have to do some editing to make the RAW file into a visible photo. Initially it’s just data with a JPEG thumbnail embedded in it for viewing on the camera screen or on a computer.

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:08:17   #
jims203 Loc: Connecticut
 
Just about any picture even one taken with an Smart phone can be improved slightly. It is worth a couple minutes if you are passionate about your images.

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:12:55   #
mborn Loc: Massachusetts
 
Yes I do except occasions I shoot JPG the camera process the image for me

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:28:46   #
bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY
 
unduki wrote:
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how I learn and I don't know the answer. I learned to use 35 mm cameras and the developing smelly MESS in Jr. High. Fast-forward to now, when I do not miss film at all... and I'm using a pretty nice DSLR. I'm older and it seems very foreign to me. Just using the camera has been challenging (very enjoyable though.) I'm currently learning about the settings - one of my projects is the Aurora Borealis.

So, my question is the topic title. Does everyone change things after they've shot? Do folks alter light and color in their Aurora Borealis photos?

Personally, I want my photos to look like what I see with my eyes. Maybe I'm being too myopic. I'm hoping I'll have opportunity sometime this week but I'll post a photo when I get one.
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how... (show quote)


I also learned in a B&W darkroom, I try to limit my "photoshoping" to what I could do there, trying to reproduce what the scene looked like to my eye.

Reply
 
 
May 14, 2019 09:33:04   #
pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY
 
unduki wrote:
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how I learn and I don't know the answer. I learned to use 35 mm cameras and the developing smelly MESS in Jr. High. Fast-forward to now, when I do not miss film at all... and I'm using a pretty nice DSLR. I'm older and it seems very foreign to me. Just using the camera has been challenging (very enjoyable though.) I'm currently learning about the settings - one of my projects is the Aurora Borealis.

So, my question is the topic title. Does everyone change things after they've shot? Do folks alter light and color in their Aurora Borealis photos?

Personally, I want my photos to look like what I see with my eyes. Maybe I'm being too myopic. I'm hoping I'll have opportunity sometime this week but I'll post a photo when I get one.
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how... (show quote)


First off, if yo are using a digital camera you edit every photo. SOOC is quasi bogus concept. If virginity is the fact that the camera software does all the editing, and you don't, well, I take that with a grain of salt.

There after, we have many schools of thought. The first to only allow the camera to create/edit your jpg, to the sky is the limit to create YOUR photo. We all pick our way through this and find our niche. To note, the camera, aka the sensor, does not necessarily capture what you see. It captures pixels. They are not the same!

This is the reason that DSLRs save raw files along with jpg. This is equivalent to the old fashioned negative, where one did their post as they printed their pictures, In stead of the smelly solutions, dark rooms and a lot of wasted time and money in product, we have a raw file. Leave the lights, open the windows, and save what you want and erase what misses. Cost, just a little time. Being allowed to experiment without a trip to the bank has some advantages.

Sensors suck in many of the lighting situations. You can ignore them and take it on the chin, or grab the Jpg or raw file and clean it up.

Bottom line every photo with DSLR has been edited. Depending on your vision you can add your fingerprint or not.

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:33:34   #
tankdonovan Loc: Tennessee
 
unduki wrote:
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how I learn and I don't know the answer. I learned to use 35 mm cameras and the developing smelly MESS in Jr. High. Fast-forward to now, when I do not miss film at all... and I'm using a pretty nice DSLR. I'm older and it seems very foreign to me. Just using the camera has been challenging (very enjoyable though.) I'm currently learning about the settings - one of my projects is the Aurora Borealis.

So, my question is the topic title. Does everyone change things after they've shot? Do folks alter light and color in their Aurora Borealis photos?

Personally, I want my photos to look like what I see with my eyes. Maybe I'm being too myopic. I'm hoping I'll have opportunity sometime this week but I'll post a photo when I get one.
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how... (show quote)


"Is it real or is it Memorex"? Remember the old saying pushing Memorex tape? Well today it is; Is it real or is it Photoshop"

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:41:42   #
tankdonovan Loc: Tennessee
 
I think the answer to your question is Yes! Everyone 'photoshop' their photos

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:42:12   #
mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey
 
tankdonovan wrote:
"Is it real or is it Memorex"? Remember the old saying pushing Memorex tape? Well today it is; Is it real or is it Photoshop"


Which is the real part? SOOC is most often less "real" looking than judiciously used post processing.

Reply
 
 
May 14, 2019 09:44:26   #
danersmiff
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
If you desire images that look like Linda's two examples, above, then you'll need the software and the artistic and technical skills to create this digital art. In the broad spectrum of post processing, this would be called "photoshopped".

Given the complexities of capturing a colorful image at night over a long exposure for the Aurora Borealis, one would expect edits on a computer in the following areas:

1. Increasing the saturation of the colors
2. Darkening the black of the sky for more contrast
3. Remove of digital noise.
4. Cropping / leveling of the image and / or horizon for a better composition.
If you desire images that look like Linda's two ex... (show quote)


from page 1... most of the time, I just do what he listed above...

..

most of the time, i just tweek the colors and saturation, contrast, and light and dark..
most of the time, i just tweek the colors and satu...
(Download)

and sometimes I see something, that makes me go bonkers
and sometimes I see something, that makes me go bo...
(Download)

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:50:16   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
danersmiff wrote:
from page 1... most of the time, I just do what he listed above...

..


And sometimes it goes from a tree to art!

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:53:42   #
jtwind
 
This is a bit of a tired subject. In photography like many things, make yourself happy, do what you want with the caveat of not harming others. Saying that, leaving it up to your camera company to decide what a scene looks like is not always or even often recording a scene, as is! Take the same jpeg photo with a canon point and shoot and a Sony a7iii and it likely will be quite different. Ansel Adams spent hours in the darkroom dodging and burning to get his prints like he wanted them to look, Edward Weston would draw with a soft pencil on his negatives to get an area darker. So if you really want a scent to look like you want or how you saw it you need to shoot Raw and post process it! IMO there is no virtue in leaving it up to your camera's algorithm.

Reply
May 14, 2019 09:56:04   #
RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas
 
unduki wrote:
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how I learn and I don't know the answer. I learned to use 35 mm cameras and the developing smelly MESS in Jr. High. Fast-forward to now, when I do not miss film at all... and I'm using a pretty nice DSLR. I'm older and it seems very foreign to me. Just using the camera has been challenging (very enjoyable though.) I'm currently learning about the settings - one of my projects is the Aurora Borealis.

So, my question is the topic title. Does everyone change things after they've shot? Do folks alter light and color in their Aurora Borealis photos?

Personally, I want my photos to look like what I see with my eyes. Maybe I'm being too myopic. I'm hoping I'll have opportunity sometime this week but I'll post a photo when I get one.
This might seem like a dumb question, but it's how... (show quote)


Here’s my opinion on this matter if you shoot RAW the photos you take are flat and need too be processed much like in the days of film.

Now if you wish to take photos without much process shoot jpegs it will be much like what you see.

Have fun with your camera and post on this site some of your photos.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 10 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.